Dynamic programming is one of the more interesting Computer Science techniques I've learned in my time as an undergrad. And I can't believe I almost received my diploma without really knowing what it means.
An Algorithms course isn't required to graduate, and I didn't realize at first exposure to the term that dynamic programming has nothing to do with writing code or dynamic languages. It's an optimization technique to simplify problems which could otherwise blow up exponentially.
It applies to nearly ever other subject I've held interest in, such as computer vision (with convolutions) or graphics (culling) or optimization in game theory. Never mind that Algorithms has crucial implications for other topics such as Networks, Databases, AI...every computer science topic is some goal-oriented application of specific algorithms. But before I digress....
Formally learning dynamic programming and its technique of solving subproblems with memoization has only increased my interest in the technique:
Until now, we've focused on greedy and recurrent algorithms in this algorithms course. Although we began by defining an efficient algorithm as any that ran in polynomial time, until this point the aim was to achieve O(n) or O(n logn) at worst, and rarely O(n^2) solutions as acceptable.
With dynamic programming we are not nearly as optimistic. The problems have constraints or conditions which render prior techniques as overly simplistic and ineffective. We creatively combine both greedy and and recurrent techniques and use swaths of storage space in hopes of achieving polynomial runtime, meaning that O(n^3) or O(n^4) is not only acceptable--sometimes it's the best we can hope for.
Despite the pessimism, dynamic programming drastically reins in very difficult problems and occasionally leads to slick O(n) solutions for problems which may otherwise run as O(2^n). It's now one of the most sophisticated, versatile tools I have in my belt--I only wish I knew it before taking several other courses.
So back to ranting, on my disbelief that the algorithms course is not required to graduate from the department. I realize it's a difficult time-consuming proof-based (everyone hates proofs, although I hate them a little less finally) course that must compete with other "essential" courses in a limited schedule space. But the thought that I nearly graduated without taking this course is scary given how fundamental it is to everything other course and topic in computer science.
True, I may never prove anything about the runtime to an algorithm I invent in The Real World. But any amount of formal reasoning is far more valuable than being "pretty sure" the solution works. Not to mention using solved problems as templates for real world stuff, or just making positive impressions at job interviews. I'm glad I'm taking algorithms now, especially since I can't travel back in time and take it any sooner.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Friday, February 20, 2009
9 hours of messing with iPhone SDK
The iPhone feels like a new frontier, at least for non-early adopters such as myself.
After learning about Walk Score, I was in a bit of disbelief that their application was not available on the iPhone. Their lookup simply requires a latitude and longitude, which the iPhone readily provides. I dreamed of running around while looking for an apartment and pressing a button on my phone to get its walk score.
So knowing nothing about Objective C, mobile development, XCode, or much else related to Apple development I set out to whip up a simple mashup of iPhone + Walk Score today and went at it for about 9 hours.
Unfortunately I haven't yet produced anything close to finished.
But I learned quite a bit.
For example, I learned that diving straight into the iPhone samples was a fruitless, frustrating process. The interface builder was not intuitive and I spent over an hour trying to add functionality to a button.
After downloading a 50-page tutorial on "Your First iPhone Application," I learned how rigorously the SDK enforces the Model-View-Controller principles, such that a simple Hello World app requires substantial scaffolding (50 pages worth!).
Additionally I got a taste of Objective C, a taste I have not yet acquired. It's more verbose than Java, yet is dynamically typed with difficult syntax and a reasonable number of dependency issues.
I learned that Objective C prefers a SAX style XML parsing.
I figured out how to send HTTP queries to Walk Score, parsed their XML response, and displayed a score for a fixed latitude and longitude.
After this I wondered if a browser based approach held more advantages. It would spare XML parsing and simply direct users to the search results page for their coordinates. This idea held appeal, since I would reuse the existing browser functionality, and some scores took time to calculate and would require a redirect anyway.
As my networks professor mused a couple of days ago, "Perhaps one of the best programmers I've met is also one of the laziest programmers I've met, he never does more than he has to for his code to get the job done. Maybe his laziness is what makes him so good." (He was relating it to the design decisions behind NAT)
After learning how to load web pages using an embedded browser, it came time to retrieve live GPS coordinates. Unfortunately, this is not as simple as a one-line API call. Using GPS is expensive battery-wise and is best done sparingly according the dev docs. For this reason a custom manager is required, which I was hooking up before deciding to call it a day and write this developer diary entry.
Perhaps later this week I will wrap up the GPS retrieval and integrate it into the iPhone app browser call. But I also learned it might not be worth it:
--Walk Score's heat maps show certain places, such as San Francisco, have near universal scores of 80-90 with only small pockets of lower quality. If the result is nearly uniform, is the experience of walking around with this app anything like I imagined?
--Apple has a certification program in place. Testing and verifying the app might be a costly endeavor, and it might not even find its way into the Apple store.
--Now that I learned some basics, I find myself less interested in this project versus what I could now begin working on.
All in all, a great experience. I'm still very excited to see what I can produce on this platform, even if I have to hold my nose to write Objective C...
After learning about Walk Score, I was in a bit of disbelief that their application was not available on the iPhone. Their lookup simply requires a latitude and longitude, which the iPhone readily provides. I dreamed of running around while looking for an apartment and pressing a button on my phone to get its walk score.
So knowing nothing about Objective C, mobile development, XCode, or much else related to Apple development I set out to whip up a simple mashup of iPhone + Walk Score today and went at it for about 9 hours.
Unfortunately I haven't yet produced anything close to finished.
But I learned quite a bit.
For example, I learned that diving straight into the iPhone samples was a fruitless, frustrating process. The interface builder was not intuitive and I spent over an hour trying to add functionality to a button.
After downloading a 50-page tutorial on "Your First iPhone Application," I learned how rigorously the SDK enforces the Model-View-Controller principles, such that a simple Hello World app requires substantial scaffolding (50 pages worth!).
Additionally I got a taste of Objective C, a taste I have not yet acquired. It's more verbose than Java, yet is dynamically typed with difficult syntax and a reasonable number of dependency issues.
I learned that Objective C prefers a SAX style XML parsing.
I figured out how to send HTTP queries to Walk Score, parsed their XML response, and displayed a score for a fixed latitude and longitude.
After this I wondered if a browser based approach held more advantages. It would spare XML parsing and simply direct users to the search results page for their coordinates. This idea held appeal, since I would reuse the existing browser functionality, and some scores took time to calculate and would require a redirect anyway.
As my networks professor mused a couple of days ago, "Perhaps one of the best programmers I've met is also one of the laziest programmers I've met, he never does more than he has to for his code to get the job done. Maybe his laziness is what makes him so good." (He was relating it to the design decisions behind NAT)
After learning how to load web pages using an embedded browser, it came time to retrieve live GPS coordinates. Unfortunately, this is not as simple as a one-line API call. Using GPS is expensive battery-wise and is best done sparingly according the dev docs. For this reason a custom manager is required, which I was hooking up before deciding to call it a day and write this developer diary entry.
Perhaps later this week I will wrap up the GPS retrieval and integrate it into the iPhone app browser call. But I also learned it might not be worth it:
--Walk Score's heat maps show certain places, such as San Francisco, have near universal scores of 80-90 with only small pockets of lower quality. If the result is nearly uniform, is the experience of walking around with this app anything like I imagined?
--Apple has a certification program in place. Testing and verifying the app might be a costly endeavor, and it might not even find its way into the Apple store.
--Now that I learned some basics, I find myself less interested in this project versus what I could now begin working on.
All in all, a great experience. I'm still very excited to see what I can produce on this platform, even if I have to hold my nose to write Objective C...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
